Road issues that irritate me.......

punisher5112

Cyclists invest in a bell it saves a lot of issues.

Quazzie

punisher5112 wrote: »

Cyclists invest in a car it saves a lot of issues.

FYP

xckjoo

Road signs and markings that are too close to the junction. It's ok if you know where you're going but if you're in an unfamiliar place and the lines of traffic are long you can't see what lane you're supposed to be in until you're on top of it.

Also, those bloody "Caution" signs. "Caution slippery surface", "Caution road liable to flooding", etc. They seem to go up but are never taken down. Do I need to be careful because the road flooded once in 2010? Loose chipping signs left on a road that's long since been resurfaced. There's so many they've become meaningless.

Quazzie wrote: »

FYP

Jesus dude. Let one go past. We get that you don't like bicycles.

mikhail

xckjoo wrote: »

Jesus dude. Let one go past. We get that you don't like bicycles.

Just as bells are useful on bicycles, ignore lists are useful on boards.

AndrewJRenko

Quazzie wrote: »

So... there might be vehicles on the cycle lane, so you don't use them, and instead you use the roads where there will be definitely vehicles because somehow that's safer. I don't get the logic.

Do you really need someone to explain the difference in finding your route blocked by a parked van and cycling alongside a moving van?

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

Where are you getting the figure of over 5000 from? As of september last year there have been approx 3500 deaths on our roads.

Apologies, my error, 3,620 I make it - I was going on a faulty memory.

1 in fifteen years vs 3,620 or 5,000 in fifteen doesn't honestly make a huge difference.

degsie

......lack of compassion between motorists and cyclists.

StudentDad

The impatience of some drivers just makes me laugh. Lets see, when I'm reversing out of a car park space and can't because I get blocked in by some idiot who fails to realise that giving me room to manoeuvre is in his own best interests!

Parallel parking is another one, I indicate, go to reverse into the space and the muppet behind me drives right up behind me preventing me reversing. The bit that really makes me laugh is that when said driver realises I'm not moving and trying to reverse into the space, then proceeds to get all annoyed because he has to either reverse himself or go around me. If he'd just stopped and let me reverse there wouldn't be an issue for him at all.

SD

DrumSteve

People cutting corners on a turn.

Thats one way of driving head first into me.

MadDog76

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Do you really need someone to explain the difference in finding your route blocked by a parked van and cycling alongside a moving van?

The moving van is more likely to hit you than the parked one?

AndrewJRenko

MadDog76 wrote: »

The moving van is more likely to hit you than the parked one?

OK, so I do need to explain it. A van parked in a cycle lane is a direct obstruction. A van driving beside a cyclist in normal traffic conditions is not an obstruction to a cyclist.

MadDog76

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

OK, so I do need to explain it. A van parked in a cycle lane is a direct obstruction. A van driving beside a cyclist in normal traffic conditions is not an obstruction to a cyclist.

I always suspected cyclists had no sense of humour .........

Pinch Flat

Swan necking. So you're driving along, car a few cars in front turns left. The tool immediately behind him swerves right to get around him, rather than waiting the couple of seconds to allow him complete the left turn. The amount of head on collisions I've witnessed with this manoeuvre is unreal.

MadDog76

Pinch Flat wrote: »

Swan necking. So you're driving along, car a few cars in front turns left. The tool immediately behind him swerves right to get around him, rather than waiting the couple of seconds to allow him complete the left turn. The amount of head on collisions I've witnessed with this manoeuvre is unreal.

How many exactly?

prinzeugen

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Doesn't really matter whether you consider the many reasons why some cyclists avoid some cycle lanes are pathetic or not. The fact remains that they have their reasons, and they don't need to justify their choice of route to you or anyone else.



If you'd like to point out any factual error in my post, I'll be happy to stand corrected. Being irritated, and in particular, posting about being irritated is most certainly a personal choice.


I'm really struggling to make sense of this. I presume that 'really' should be 'rarely', but I've no idea what is meant by 'let you on'.

In general, I agree with you that 'prevention is better' and we should focus our prevention activities on the big, serious issues - like the killing of 200 people each year by motorists.


Again, I'm struggling to make sense here. I've no idea how someone else's question becomes 'my research.' If other people have other questions, surely it is up to them to go digging.

And as for the 'backing down' - I don't believe that I ever said 'never', but if you'd like to point out where I said that, I'll again be happy to stand corrected. So just to clarify - there have been very rare events where pedestrians have been killed by cyclists in Ireland. The most recent one was around 2002 or 2003. I think there was one in 1998 as well.

Since the 2003 death, over 5,000 have been killed by motorists on the road - just for context.

Again, can you prove that motorists are 100% directly responsible for these 200 odd deaths?

No you can't. And cyclists do kill people. 6 cases last year in the UK and 600+ maimed by cyclists.

The amount of f*cking idiots who can't seem to turn right properly off a road and insist on cutting over the road markings into the left hand lane thereby risking a collision with cars that may be exiting from that road.

the_pen_turner

Deleted User wrote: »

The amount of f*cking idiots who can't seem to turn right properly off a road and insist on cutting over the road markings into the left hand lane thereby risking a collision with cars that may be exiting from that road.

drives me nuts.

i love it when it lines up right so you can push them back to their own side. when they start to line up to cut but you can stay comming forward towards the line but they have to adjust left a bit. if you stay coming they will stay corecting left. great fun.
very selective fun. wouldnt risk it with most. they have to be going really slow.

Liam28

Reading through (some of) this thread, some common areas keep coming up. So made me think, where does the worst driving behavior happen? Roundabouts and motorways seem to be consistent black spots. Although motorways have huge numbers of middle-lane-morons, tailgaters, lane-hoppers, merge-morons, and overtaking lane hoggers, for sheer percentages roundabouts must be the worst. In my experience the majority of drivers commit a driving issue at roundabouts: either lane use or indicator use. Whether through ignorance or apathy, drivers indicating correctly approaching and exiting a roundabout are the exception rather than the rule.
Other regular offenders in this thread are parking / car parks and junctions / right turns.

ILikeBoats

What is the best way to deal with a middle lane hogger?

Boom_Bap

ILikeBoats wrote: »

What is the best way to deal with a middle lane hogger?

Depends on the context really. If you want to overtake them, overtake them safely in lane 3.
If you don't want to over take them, stay in lane 1 behind them.

ILikeBoats

Yeah sorry.

So I'd always try to stay in lane 1. If the road is mildly busy, you'd find yourself going from lane 1 to lane 3 and back again over and over. Soon enough you just get tired of it and stick to lane 2 or 3 just because it's easier than constantly moving over and back. You then become a middle lane moron or a lane 3 hogger. It is very irritating!

Some days I'd love to get one of them LED scrolling signs for the back window and pull in front of a middle lane warrior going 70km and tell them if they should be in the left lane.

I don't know why I let it bother me.

Boom_Bap

It bothers everyone, but sticking to the rules of the road is important with middle lane hoggers.

If you are in L1 and undertake, they may decide to get in L1 all of a sudden, if they hit you, you are at fault as you are undertaking.

GBX

Deleted User wrote: »

The amount of f*cking idiots who can't seem to turn right properly off a road and insist on cutting over the road markings into the left hand lane thereby risking a collision with cars that may be exiting from that road.

Not filmed here - but happens quite often here nonetheless.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j8war6lZZOk

valoren

Note to Pedestrians.

A zebra crossing does not automatically entitle you to walk onto the road without even looking for oncoming traffic.

Dravokivich

valoren wrote: »

Note to Pedestrians.

A zebra crossing does not automatically entitle you to walk onto the road without even looking for oncoming traffic.

We are meant to put our foot down to show we intend to use it.

Cantona's Collars

valoren wrote: »

Note to Pedestrians.

A zebra crossing does not automatically entitle you to walk onto the road without even looking for oncoming traffic.

My pet hate is people standing literally a few yards from one in the hope traffic will stop to allow them to cross,just use the crossing you numpties.

Liam28

Boom_Bap wrote: »

It bothers everyone, but sticking to the rules of the road is important with middle lane hoggers.

If you are in L1 and undertake, they may decide to get in L1 all of a sudden, if they hit you, you are at fault as you are undertaking.

I don't think so. If a middle lane hogger changes lane from L2 to L1 and hits a car in L1, the hogger is at fault, as he made the lane change. Undertaking on a motorway is not an offence: there are no penalty points for it. But changing lanes without checking is careless driving.

valoren

Dravokivich wrote: »

We are meant to put our foot down to show we intend to use it.

I know. It's those who simply walk onto the crossing without even looking around.

Boom_Bap

Liam28 wrote: »

I don't think so. If a middle lane hogger changes lane from L2 to L1 and hits a car in L1, the hogger is at fault, as he made the lane change. Undertaking on a motorway is not an offence: there are no penalty points for it. But changing lanes without checking is careless driving.

I recall reading a massive discussion on this before and undertaking trumps careless driving in this case due to a potential blind spot of the driver in L2. I think it was proven with the rules of the road as well which is why it has stuck with me.

CaptainR

If someone is in the overtaking lane of a two lane motorway doing 100km/h and refusing to move over, does that mean you can't pass them? Could a case not be argued that they were at fault?

degsie

Let's have a 10 page discussion on undertaking shall we? :rolleyes: